Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology

2014 Edition
| Editors: Thomas Teo

Epistemological Violence

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5583-7_441

Introduction

It is a historical fact that empirical psychology (and other empirical social sciences) has produced research work that must be labeled as racist, classist, sexist, etc. Empirical methods and commitments to empiricism and “objectivity” could not prevent the reality that minorities, women, gays and lesbians, subaltern groups, lower classes, people with disabilities, etc. were portrayed as inferior or as a problem when differences were found. How was (and is) that possible and how should this “knowledge” produced in scientific racism, sexism, classism, etc. be characterized? How can it be understood from the perspective of persons or groups who are constructed in harmful ways? Teo (2008, 2010, 2011a, b) has argued that harmful empirical “knowledge” (results and interpretations) that is disseminated in academic work on race, gender, class, disability, homosexuality, etc. can be understood as a form of violence.

In order to understand the construction of harmful knowledge of...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Duhem, P. (1954). The aim and structure of physical theory (P. P. Wiener, Trans.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1905).Google Scholar
  2. Galtung, J. (1969). Violence, peace, and peace research. Journal of Peace Research, 3, 167–191.Google Scholar
  3. Gould, S. J. (1996). The mismeasure of man (revised and expanded). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  4. Holzkamp, K. (1981). Theorie und Experiment in der Psychologie: Eine grundlagenkritische Untersuchung (Zweite, um ein Nachwort erweiterte Auflage) [Theory and experiment in psychology: A study critical of its foundations (2nd ed.)]. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter. (Original work published 1964).Google Scholar
  5. Quine, W. V. O. (1969). Ontological relativity and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the subaltern speak? In C. Nelson & L. Grossberg (Eds.), Marxism and the interpretation of culture (pp. 271–313). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  7. Teo, T. (2008). From speculation to epistemological violence in psychology: A critical-hermeneutic reconstruction. Theory & Psychology, 18(1), 47–67.Google Scholar
  8. Teo, T. (2010). What is epistemological violence in the empirical social sciences? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(5), 295–303.Google Scholar
  9. Teo, T. (2011a). Empirical race psychology and the hermeneutics of epistemological violence. Human Studies, 34(3), 237–255.Google Scholar
  10. Teo, T. (2011b). Theory and empirical research: Can scientific ideas be violent? In P. Stenner, J. Cromby, J. Motzkau, J. Yen, & Y. Haosheng (Eds.), Theoretical psychology: Global transformations and challenges (pp. 239–246). Concord, ON: Captus.Google Scholar
  11. Waldron, J. (2012). The harm in hate speech. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyYork UniversityTorontoCanada